London: Dignified and solemn, and a display of all the ceremony that Britain could muster, Sir Winston Churchill’s State funeral 50 years ago was the country’s epic farewell to its revered wartime leader.

But Buckingham Palace courtiers were initially opposed to giving such an honour to a mere `commoner’, previously unpublished official papers reveal. Their concerns have come to light as Britain prepares to mark the 50th anniversary of the funeral, which took place on January 30, 1965.

Official documents in the Parliamentary Archive in the House of Commons show that Royal representatives first raised their concerns in 1959 — just as civil servants were beginning to plan the event.

A record of a `Garter Meeting’ which took place on June 23 that year states: `It was clear that Garter and the Palace representatives did not appreciate the vast scale on which this occasion is likely to develop — at any rate as regards the lying in state. In this they were considerably influenced by the theory that the funeral of a commoner must in all respects be on a smaller scale than that of a Royal person.’

The same document also refers to a proposal to include French and American troops in the event alongside representatives of the police, civil defence and Commonwealth forces.

It states: `Opinion seemed to be against this, partly on the grounds that the procession must not be larger than that of a reigning Monarch and partly because it would be difficult to know where to stop.’

At one point it was even suggested that Prince Philip should act as one of the pallbearers.

News of the Palace’s concerns will surprise many because the Queen was known to have been close to Sir Winston, who was Prime Minister when she came to the throne in 1952.

Historian Andrew Roberts, the author of the book Eminent Churchillians, said it was quite possible that the Queen herself had not been aware of the opposition.

He said: `It is interesting that Buckingham Palace didn’t want Churchill’s funeral to overshadow Royal funerals. On one level you can see their point a bit. But this isn’t necessarily the Queen herself — it sounds like courtiers, who are often more conservative than the Monarch.

`The very fact that the Queen went to the funeral of a commoner was a complete break with precedent.’

The files show that preparations for Churchill’s funeral were revised seven times in the years leading up to his death and that the last revision occurred just a month before he died on January 24, 1965.

Officials spent a great deal of time planning what to do in the event of Sir Winston dying abroad.

The files show that the Royal Navy was charged with bringing Churchill’s body home in the event of him dying in France, Belgium or Holland. In any other country, the Royal Air Force would have been responsible for repatriation. In the event, he died in his London home.

Attended by dignitaries from 112 countries — a record — it was the largest state funeral to date. The former Prime Minister’s body lay in state for three days in Westminster Hall and more than 300,000 people waited to pay their respects. Silent crowds lined the street as the cortege made its way from Westminster to St Paul’s Cathedral and dockers bowed their cranes as the coffin was carried down the River Thames.

Last night, Buckingham Palace declined to comment.

— (c) Mail On Sunday